Vie Aesthetics Holborn

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

This is the first inspection for this clinic location since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. We received positive relevant feedback from people using the service and saw similar positive reviews people gave after each consultation.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of their patients, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The provider’s website included full details of treatments offered, their prices and staff biographies.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to people’s individual needs, including large font material when requested. It had access to an interpreter service, including British Sign Language practitioners. The service could also translate written material for people whose first language was not English.

People could sign up to receive newsletters regarding the service and could access videos and blogs on the provider’s website and through its various social media accounts.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. It involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

After each consultation, people were invited to submit feedback using the provider’s IT system, with the comments being reviewed by the provider’s senior staff.

We saw the provider also conducted service user surveys and acted on feedback received. The most recent survey, conducted in June 2024, had 159 responses. Actions taken following the feedback included arranging evening educational events, involving live demonstrations. Also, the provider had conducted a live interactive webinar addressing menopause issues and set up social media accounts to post educational videos.

The provider had a detailed complaints policy and guidance on submitting complaints was included on the service website. The process included provision for escalation to an independent adjudicator. Complaints were a standing agenda item for monthly clinical governance meetings. However, there had been no formal complaints in the 12 months preceding our assessment. We reviewed the detailed record of a complaint from prior to that period and noted it had been processed appropriately. We saw staff undertook training relating to the Duty of Candour and put it into practice.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Th regulated activities at the Holborn clinic were conducted by the provider’s medical director, a doctor registered by the General Medical Council. The clinic operated to provide the regulated activities on Wednesdays and Fridays, with consultations only by appointment. Another doctor who had worked at the clinic had left in May 2026. The provider told us recruitment for a replacement was planned and once an appointment was made the operating days for regulated activities could potentially increase.

People could access the service to suit their needs, for example online, in person and by telephone, allowing for greater flexibility and convenience. The premises were accessible to people with mobility issues, with a treatment room and toilet on the ground floor. A portable ramp was available to assist people over the two-step threshold. Staff discussed and recorded people’s access needs at the time of booking.

Feedback provided by people using service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and adjusted services to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had systems to capture and review feedback from people after each consultation and by surveys. Staff had received equality and diversity training.

We saw evidence the provider offered reasonable adjustments where appropriate. These included offering longer appointments, to allow detailed discussion and understanding of people needs, or booking appointments at a quieter time of day if that was a person’s preference.

People were supported to choose appropriate treatments and where appropriate to access NHS services where ongoing care and treatment was likely to be required.